Harris Gets Major Boost in Shock Last-Minute Swing State Predictions

One of Nevada’s foremost election experts has predicted that Kamala Harris will narrowly win the presidential election in the state.

Jon Ralston, editor of The Nevada Independent, predicted that Harris will beat Donald Trump 48.5 percent to 48.2 percent—a margin of only 0.3 percent.

Ralston predicted that Harris voters would be able to catch up with Republicans’ early lead because the plurality of non–major party voters would ultimately swing for Harris.

“There are a lot of nonpartisans who are closet Democrats who were purposely registered by Democrat-aligned groups as nonpartisans,” Ralston wrote. “The machine knows who they are and will get them to vote. It will be just enough to overcome the Republican lead—along with women motivated by abortion and crossover votes that issue also will cause.”

Of the slightly more than one million votes submitted during the mail-in and early voting period, Republicans accounted for 38.4 percent, Democrats 33.6 percent, and nonpartisans and other parties represented 28 percent, according to the Nevada Current.

The winner of Nevada’s presidential election would not be clear on election night, according to Ralston. Results from the Silver State are more likely to come in on Wednesday or Thursday.

Ralston has correctly called the winner of the state’s presidential election for decades, including in 2016 and 2020, when the state went for Hillary Clinton and President Joe Biden respectively.

Over the weekend, The Des Moines Register’s Iowa poll, conducted by Selzer & Co., found that Harris had “leapfrogged” Trump in Iowa and was leading him by 47 percent to 44 percent. The Iowa poll correctly predicted Trump’s victory in the state in 2020 and 2016, and is considered the gold standard of accurate polling.

Steve Bannon isn’t predicting a blowout election result for Donald Trump—rather, he seems to have resigned himself to a painfully close presidential race.

During Monday’s episode of the War Room podcast, the former Trump strategist said that the margins in swing states would be “razor-thin at best.”

National polls do show an incredibly close race: FiveThirtyEight, which aggregates national polls, found Trump and Kamala Harris were in a dead heat Monday, with Harris leading Trump 48 percent to 46.9 percent, within the margin of error.

But Bannon’s willingness to deliver hard truths represents a notable shift for the mastermind behind the MAGA movement. Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster, Trump’s ex–national security adviser, once described Bannon as Trump’s “fawning court jester” during his first administration. Now, even Bannon has given up on padding the former president’s ego.

In an interview with Newsweek Monday, Bannon said that in 2016, he’d had “100 percent metaphysical certitude” Trump would win, Now, he was “close to 100 percent” certain Trump would win, if Republicans were able to “execute” their ground game on Election Day. Unfortunately for him, early voting has indicated that Trump’s ground game has been falling apart in Pennsylvania, a key battleground state.

Acknowledging the close race between Trump and Harris likely won’t change Bannon’s strategy for what the Republican presidential nominee should do on Tuesday night: Declare victory regardless before the election has been called.

Only days before the 2020 presidential election, Bannon said that Trump would announce himself as the winner regardless of how Americans had voted, according to leaked audio obtained by Mother Jones.

“What Trump’s gonna do is just declare victory. Right? He’s gonna declare victory. But that doesn’t mean he’s a winner,” Bannon said. “He’s just gonna say he’s a winner.”

Trump was able to claim that the election had been stolen by seizing on early returns and voter perception that he’d been ahead. After being released from jail last month, Bannon urged Trump to do the exact same thing.

“If the votes come in like it looks like they’re gonna come in, he should step up and inform American citizens of exactly what’s going on and not keep people in the dark like was done in 2020,” Bannon said.

Bannon isn’t the only Trump ally whose unshakeable faith in their beloved leader has begun to falter. Susie Wiles, co-manager of Trump’s campaign, issued an internal memo Sunday filled with qualifying phrases like “should we be victorious,” “regardless of the outcome of the election,” and “God willing” seeming to acknowledge that Trump no longer had the election in the bag.

With less than 24 hours on the clock until Election Day, Donald Trump is attempting to sway undecided voters with an ad featuring a bright vision of America—except it has one fatal flaw: None of the images used are actually of America.

In a campaign flub that almost seems too basic to be true, the ad connects images and a narrative that are entirely unrelated, according to NBC News, which obtained the clip through a strategist that opposes Trump.

During a portion of the hit that claims that American “values were labeled shameful,” the advertisement features a still shot taken in Germany during 2012, according to Getty, which sells the image. Two more clips from the ad were taken from Thailand—a model in Thailand dressed as a construction worker appears with narration questioning if America can make a comeback. Then a voiceover tying the notion that Americans have effectively “surrendered” their paychecks runs alongside footage from a grocery store parking lot in Thailand recorded during 2020.

It’s not even the first time that Trump’s team has made this mistake. While attempting to capitalize on a late summer jobs report during the 2020 campaign season, Trump’s campaign featured stock footage from Italy and Ukraine while playing it off as images from the U.S.

Donald Trump’s most recent tariffs announcement reaffirms what we already knew: He’s just making things up as he goes along.

At a North Carolina campaign rally on Monday that covered everything from the Space Force to Van Jones’s tears, the former president took time to offer some new economic policy on Mexico.

“We’re being invaded by Mexico. But now they have a new president in Mexico … very, a very nice woman, they say, I haven’t met her. And I’m gonna inform her, on day one or sooner, that, if they don’t stop this onslaught of criminals and drugs coming into our country, I’m going to immediately impose a 25 percent tariff on everything they send in to the United States of America.… You’re the first ones I’ve told it to, congratulations, North Carolina.”

Trump said the tariffs have a “100 percent chance of working” because if the 25 percent tariff doesn’t work, he’ll increase it to 50 percent, then 75 percent, and then 100 percent. 

This isn’t the first time Trump has proposed sprawling tariffs on imports, and it’s something that economists everywhere think is an incredibly foolish plan. Such a steep tariff hike would lead to absurd price increases on good working families everywhere, especially on avocados, beer, and alcohol—all significant imports from Mexico. Trump has heard this all before but shrugs it off because he believes that the tariffs will force companies to return to the U.S.

This is far from Trump’s most ridiculous take on tariffs. Just weeks ago he stated to Bloomberg’s John Micklethwait that he wanted “a 100, 200, 2,000 percent tariff” on imports. “The higher the tariff, the more likely it is that the company will come into the United States.”

But Mexico is America’s number one trading partner. And his latest proposal to increase tariffs whenever he feels like it reveals how little he understands about the impacts here.

This is a candidate that is so completely out of touch with reality that he would make goods incredibly expensive for the normal Americans he claims to care about just to strong-arm businesses into coming back here. Trump is flying blind, and we’re all stuck along for the ride.

Elon Musk has admitted that his $1 million daily giveaway isn’t really a lottery at all.

In Pennsylvania court on Monday, the lawyers for Musk and his America super PAC told Common Pleas Court Judge Angelo Foglietta that the prizes were not part of a giveaway or lottery, as “there is no prize to be won” and winners “are not chosen at random.”

Instead, attorney Chris Gober argued that the cash, which since early October was given each day to a registered voter in a battleground state who signed a pledge to uphold the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution, is a salary the recipients supposedly “earn” to be a spokesperson for the PAC. The recipients, registered to vote in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin, aren’t chosen randomly but are picked based on their personal story and “suitability to serve,” according to Gober.

“The $1 million recipients are not chosen by chance,” Gober said. “We know exactly who will be announced as the $1 million recipient today and tomorrow.”

In response, lawyers for the Philadelphia district attorney’s office, who are suing Musk and the PAC for operating an illegal lottery in the Keystone State, argued that this was a “complete admission of liability,” especially since Musk said when he first announced the giveaway that the recipients would be chosen “randomly.” To make their point explicit, the lawyers for the district attorney’s office showed Musk’s statement to the judge. In response, Gober tried to make the argument that “randomly” and “by chance” are two different things, in his case that Musk’s giveaway is not an illegal lottery.

Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner took the witness stand himself, calling the giveaway a scam and asked for it to be shut down.

“This was all a political marketing masquerading as a lottery,” Krasner said. “That’s what it is. A grift.”

Musk’s lawyers said that they plan to stop the giveaway after the election Tuesday, and the PAC has pledged to give the recipients their money by November 30, according to evidence they presented in court. More than one million people have registered for the chance to win the cash prize, and Krasner in court questioned what Musk and the PAC will do with their personal data.

“They were scammed for their information,” Krasner said. “It has almost unlimited use.”

Two weeks ago, the Justice Department sent the PAC a warning letter stating that the lottery may violate federal laws against paying people to register to vote. For one day, the giveaway seemed to stop, only to resume the next day with two prizes awarded. Musk tried to have the Philadelphia lawsuit moved to federal court, but a federal judge rejected the request on Friday. Now, if the world’s richest man faces any consequences for giving away money for political purposes, it will come from a civil lawsuit in a Pennsylvania state court.